A Major Apple Weakness Could Harm Mac OS X

We all know that Mac OS X is a superior
operating system. Itis easy to use by novices
and experts alike. It has a modern infrastructure
which includes seldom discussed items such as
launchd and the Common Data Security Architecture.
It has great attention to security, consistency, and
minimizes tinkerability while meeting the needs
of many business and technical professionals.

Apple makes a big fuss about Mac OS X. Each
version is eagerly awaited with great anticipation.
Weire all particularly excited about Leopard. And so we all hope that Mac OS X
will reign supreme for all time.

Maybe not. What what if Apple, someday, were to lose some of their
focus on Mac OS X? Iim not thinking about next year, but I am
thinking about the not too distant future when the dust settles on
Appleis consumer electronic ambitions.

One reason Iim thinking about this is that, it seems to me, never
has there been more of a gulf between the public perception of
Apple and the core competency of Apple -- integrating computer
hardware and an operating system. The other reason it comes to
mind is an article I wrote previously about Apple and degrees of freedom. Apple doesnit like commitments
to end users. They rarely partner with large customer
organizations. They will partner with companies like Disney and
Intel, but only on the supply side.

In order to ask questions about Appleis long term commitment to
Mac OS X, one has to look at instances where Apple has made firm
commitments to customers. There arenit many.

A Tale of Two Stories

What started me thinking about all this was the combination of two
stories here at TMO on Wednesday. The first was the blog
from David Sobotta back on December 25th about how Apple show managers in Cupertino,
clueless about the Federal Market, proceeded to do a lot of stupid
things at a federal computer show called FOSE, held every year in
Washington D.C.

The combination of the two stories reminded me of the stark
difference between the technology of a UNIX operating system, the
public perception of Apple, and how Apple manages its image.

Mr. Sobottais Blog described an incident that was typical of
Apple. It all started when a bright young fellow at Apple started
to work on an extensive security briefing document for
publication. As I recall, the original draft was on the order of
30 pages and went into some very important fundamentals of Mac OS
Xis security architecture and features. But, of course, before
such documements can be released to the public, they must be
reviewed by Marketing Communications with a fine attention to
detail and image. In the end, after review, the security briefing
was a shadow if its former self and diluted in the extreme.

It requires some patience to find the final version of that paper.
One reference, in fact, starts at the top of Appleis IT
Pro site but the link to the security tech brief is dead which
is rather confusing. Itis probably just an oversight.

Another link is at the very bottom of Appleis Mac OS X
features page. That link is active and will allow you download
the watered down 13 page paper.

When I recall the process involved, I am reminded that there is a
thick layer of insulation between Appleis technical people and
their technical customers. This has been an irritation before, and it
could become a problem in the future.

A lot of the material that is directed towards these kinds of
customers is nothing more than links to stories about Apple as
opposed to material created by technical professionals within
Apple and communicated to end users. Even the Apple inspired site
MacResearch.org is simply an
effort to allow technically deep professionals to share their
knowledge with other users because Apple, fundamentally, is
uncomfortable doing it themselves.

The reason is that Apple is a company thatis all about
image, and they would prefer not to have technical professionals
communicating directly with customers. In some cases, experience
has shown that scientists and engineers donit have the skills to
communicate certain messages in a desirable fashion. But Apple,
as a UNIX vendor, carries that far overboard.

As a result, highly technical material is, outside of the Apple
Developer Connection, either hard to find, watered down, or
non-existent. This was a typical complaint to me when I engaged
Apple customers in years past. It is a credit to a few very
talented individuals at Apple that a wealth of security
information related to Smart Cards, Common Criteria, security
certifications, and encryption has been published in barely
acceptable detail. However, Apple is only one lay-off or two away
from completely losing this credibility with its customers.

The Two Faces of Apple

As we approach the release of Leopard, it is more
and more evident that the public fuss about Apple,
its image building, its foray into consumer electronics
with the iTV and possibly an iPod that can make phone calls,
is creating a larger and larger gulf between Appleis non-technical
consumers and technical professionals.

A company that started out, in its first 25 years, making mostly
very nice computers and operating systems, is on the verge of a
major shift in its focus and revenues. As more and more of Appleis
revenue comes from consumer devices, priorities will shift.
Resources, which are always spread thin at Apple, typically get directed
towards the latest hot consumer project.

Lest we forget, going to war against Windows, while a formidable
foe, is easy in one very important way because the security
architecture of Windows is so messed up. Because a comprehensive
fix is not forthcoming, Mac OS X will have significant edge in that
area for years to come. On the other hand, the home theater market
and the cell phone markets are full of pitfalls, traps, and clever
competitors. These markets, while a huge opportunity,
will distract Apple.

One sign that a loss of focus is at least possible is that Apple goes out
of its way to avoid long term relationships with customers.
Products are abandoned without notice and replaced by new ones.
Apple avoids long term business relationships with research
agencies and universities in advanced computation. What commitments
Apple does have are short term or easily broken. Apple spokespersons,
those who are press-certified, are typically non-technical. Apple
has few Ph.Ds on staff who are empowered to work closely with
customers on long-term research projects. Apple declines to
sponsor important events, technical TV specials
and conferences.

Mr. Sobotta pointed out in his Blog cited above that Apple doesnit
allow third party vendors in its booth at the largest professional
conferences. The very people who are most technically capable
of demonstrating technical solutions on Mac OS X are denied booth
access in favor of Apple volunteers who are not qualified to
demonstrate the most capable and advanced software that appeals
to conference attendees. (And industry analysts.) The Blog went on to
point out that Mr. Jobs forbids literature in the booths. Technical
professionals go home from a show loaded with dreams. They look at
brochures and technical data from companies like HP and Dell and
study, analyze and dream their next computer project. But they get
nothing from Apple to sit on their office desk every day, cry out in four colors,
and remind them of their dreams.

The technical community in the U.S. only has so much patience.
They require a dialogue with Apple, not a monologue. They require
some very serious technical interchange with Apple engineers and
scientists, but there are precious few hired by Apple who have the
charter to conduct collaborations. Technical documents come
from Apple highly filtered and diluted, and as a result,
Apple never feels a sense of partnership with its enterprise
customers.

Donit misunderstand me. Mac OS X is a superior OS. It retains
a special status within Apple and makes their beautifully designed
computers worth buying. Mac OS X is also the hub of Appleis
digital lifestyle, making operations with video, audio, design
and creativity a joy. Leopard will be terrific.

My concern is this. As Apple moves more and more into consumer
electronics, its tendency to favor image over substance and
block serious technical cooperation with enterprise customers
will become more and more at odds with what it takes
to deliver a robust UNIX OS. Apple tends to hide behind their
Marketing Communications division, a group of people who shudder with fear
when presented with technical material to publish. So
they water it down until it becomes useless.

Appleis aloof approach, technical shyness, and reluctance to
support long-term research with customers is one of its
biggest weaknesses. In the long run, that will harm the best
UNIX OS ever conceived.